The Bombay High Court granted bail to 14 Muslim men accused of communal violence during the Ram Temple consecration celebrations, citing lack of evidence for premeditated conspiracy. Justice Jamadar noted insufficient proof of their involvement and deemed continued detention unwarranted. The court highlighted coincidental presence in the area, undermining claims of intent.
The Supreme Court criticized the Karnataka government’s repeated oversights in legal representation during a criminal case. Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan expressed frustration over inaccurate instructions and indicated they may summon the Chief Secretary if proper assistance is not provided. The case pertains to interim bail amidst charges of organized crime.
Former Chief Justice of India UU Lalit praised the new criminal laws for addressing mob lynching and welcomed changes related to hit-and-run cases. He supported the 15-day police custody rule and hailed the abolition of the colonial-era sedition law. Lalit compared the new laws to previous anti-terrorism legislation and emphasized the need for a democratic society.
Today On 1st August, Khalid Saifi contested an attempt to murder charge in connection with the Delhi riots case at the Delhi High Court. His legal team argued that the charge lacks evidence, especially since the Arms Act charges were dropped and no weapon was recovered. The court expressed reluctance to dismiss the plea, citing witness statements placing Saifi at the scene.
Today, On 24th May, Medha Patkar convicted in a defamation case filed by VK Saxena for making defamatory statements. The ruling holds legal implications, as she faces up to two years in jail or a fine. This marks a significant development in their long-standing legal dispute. Additionally, Patkar faces charges of fraud in a separate case.
Yesterday, On 21st May, The accused in the Kanhaiya Kumar assault case bail granted by the Karkardooma Court on May 21. The incident involved an assault on the Congress leader and a woman politician. The defendant was required to provide a bail bond of Rs 25,000 and a surety bond of the same amount. The court balanced the presumption of innocence with the state’s concern for public order and investigation integrity before granting bail.
